Tuesday
04Dec2007
SECOND HOLOCAUST POSTPONED?
Tuesday, December 4, 2007 at 09:11PM Isn't it interesting to watch the MSM rush to embrace the latest US National Intelligence Agency report suggesting that Iran has halted its nuclear weapons programme in 2003? I mean for the past SIX YEARS all the MSM has done is mock US Intelligence but once it says what they soooo want to hear, hey presto, it's credible and authoritative.
But I wonder what those who Iran would like to see "wiped off the map" think about this report?
Defense Minister Ehud Barak said "it's apparently true" that Iran stopped pursuing its military nuclear program in 2003. "But in our opinion, since then it has apparently continued that program," Barak told Army Radio. "There are differences in the assessments of different organizations in the world about this, and only time will tell who is right." Asked if the new U.S. assessment reduced chances that the U.S. will launch a military strike on Iran, Barak said that was "possible." However, he said, "We cannot allow ourselves to rest just because of an intelligence report from the other side of the earth, even if it is from our greatest friend."
Iran must be laughing all the way to the nuclear stock piles. Why on EARTH would it cease to advance its plans to finish what Hitler started, when all it can see is a weak-willed international community which prefers to believe the unbelievable?
in Iran
Iran 
View Printer Friendly Version
Reader Comments (33)
So it is a bad thing they stopped?
Have they?
David Vance -
The Guardian and BBC have, quite astonishingly, overlooked this from the report:
We judge with moderate confidence that the earliest possible date Iran would be technically capable of producing enough highly enriched uranium (HEU) for a weapon is late 2009.
The programme stands, nothing has changed.
According to the source you cited.
Everyone only believes what they want to believe according to their own prejudices.
I mean for the past SIX YEARS all the MSM has done is mock US Intelligence but once it says what they soooo want to hear, hey presto, it's credible and authoritative.
Whereas those who believed US intelligence for the past 6 years now are saying that this report must be wrong.
Not according to Israel.
the world's gone dim dhimmi.
we need men of iron with wills of steel to crush the enemy; and fight to the last man,
No mercy, no prisoners.
One Ulster, one Reich, one Fuhrer ( DV)
I agree that at best it's a delay in the mullahs' plans.
I think Bush will bomb them anyway before he exits the White House. He has followed the neo-cons in all big foreign policy decisions and this will be no different. Anyone in Iran who thinks that this is "peace in our time" will get a shock.
of course the Iranians stoped certain aspects of its weapon program, look back at the dates that bthe work ceased. Gee what was going on? It couldn't be that Aque Kahns network out of Pakistan (where Iran got a lot of their stuf) was rolled up and oh that one other little thing The Invasion of Iraq and the complete collapse of it's army in what 10 days.
Smalls things like that just might have had an effect, just ask Qadafi.
The report also states that is not being reported that Iran stoped the hardware aspects of the delivery system but doubled its efforts in refinement. In other words NOTHING changed its all in how the press wants to spin only PIECES of the report.
Iran also at that same time made multiple visits to N Korea and has since then purchased the missile and warhead componants from them rather than manufacture them in country. Don't forget in 04 Iran had as many scientists at the N Korean Nuke test as the Koreans did. I guess they were just there on vacation huh.
The Left is determined not to see anythreat period. Threats = loss to left because everyone knows that we will all die depending on them to defend us....
Given the record of intelligence agencies in predicting which countries are about to go nuclear, I certainly don't think that this should be taken as though it were infallible.
For once I'm listening intently to The Troll. I think he's spot on here.
One way or another, nukes or not, Iran is a clear threat to peace in the ME. That nation more than most is feeding the Iraqi violence. Time I think to deal with them—though please not violently. It will backfire, as it did in Iraq.
That poll in the top-right corner is interesting. Nearly 40% of respondents believe that it is "better to let Iran have nukes than risk further confrontation". But if Iran has nukes, then there would be future confrontation with a nuclear-armed Iran whose ideology is an existential threat to non-muslims. Those 40% are imbeciles.
Dawkins -
Hah! What does
That nation more than most is feeding the Iraqi violence. Time I think to deal with them - though please not violently.
mean? You don't mean a telling off at the UN do you? Inhuman!
One way or another, nukes or not, Iran is a clear threat to peace in the ME. That nation more than most is feeding the Iraqi violence.
Dawkins, have you any proof for your charges?
Oh here we go again. Regime-sponsored military parades with banners saying 'Death to Israel' and 'Death to America' as a backdrop for smiling mullahs as they watch the soldiers drive by, will that do you? The fact that the same mullahs follow the apocalyptic Cult of the Mahdi and are led by a man who thinks he is the actual Messiah who can only come to divinity through that apocalypse? Would you give nukes to David Icke?
Even some of the most diehard Leftists on this site have grudgingly admitted the truth - is it really that tough for you to follow suit?
Pete Moore,
Certainly not. But I'd have thought we were sufficiently evolved by now to have a more imaginative response than a brutish declaration of war. Perhaps you have some interesting thoughts on a more civilized strategy?
Daytripper,
I personally have no proof, no. I'm going on reports such as this one.
Via Azamehr's blog:
US INtelligence Report on Iran
"I have never commented on Islamic Republic's nuclear weapons program, simply because I don't have any information nor any expertise on this subject. I do however know that US intelligence on Iran is bollocks, they have no substantial knowledge or intelligence on Iran.
My instincts have always been to be against not only nuclear weapons but against nuclear energy too,.... I have been against any military attacks on Iran and instead have always solicited international public support for the pro-democracy movement in Iran.
I do however have first hand experience of US State department officials and their lack of intelligence on Iran, which spans over three decades
I have witnessed a full blown revolution take place right after Jimmy Carter stated "Iran was an island of stability in a turbulent region".
I have witnessed US officials refer to Khomeini as a "saint" and as "Iran's Gandhi".
I have read how US intelligence had concluded that there was no danger to its diplomats in the US embassy in Tehran just before the embassy was taken over by pro-Khomeini students and the US diplomats were taken as hostages for 444 days.
I have read how time and time again the US officials trusted the Iranian authorities that the US hostage crisis will soon be resolved.
I have witnessed US officials apologise for the US role in the 1953 coup, to the very people who supported and benefited from the coup against the secular Iranian prime minister, i.e. disciples of Ayatollah Kashani, who are now in power in Iran"
Heh.
http://azarmehr.blogspot.com/
FYI,
Good piece of blogging by Alzamehr. I'm left wondering whom to believe. Could be I'm biased but I'd take the word of the Americans sooner than that of the Iranians.
That's not to say of course that both sides aren't liars.
"Dawkins, have you any proof for your charges?"
I personally have no proof, no. I'm going on reports such as this one.
dawkins, those findings were hotly contested by many professional soldiers in the US armed services. and i very recently read a report that showed the nationality of non-iraqi fighters arrested inside iraq. iran was one of the smallest contingents. im only home briefly so i will hunt out the sources for both later. of course thats not to say they are not using proxies, or providing no assistance whatsoever.
either way the evidence is obviously fairly weak on all counts or they would be bombarding us with it. and on the flipside there is more evidence to suggest that the neo-conservatives wanted to invade all these countries, come hell or high water, even before 9/11. A brief read of the Project for the New American Century (PNAC) policy statement, "Rebuilding Americas Defenses", demonstrates this all too clearly. They even talk abour 'Pax Americana'. yet their advocates claim these missions are not imperialist.
Stratfor has an interesting take on the NIE report and the Bush strategy. One link is coming through another blog because you have to be a subscriber to get this report, the other link is Stratfor's free blog report.
http://rednecktexan.blogspot.com/2007/12/striking-deal-with-devil.html
http://blogs.stratfor.com/friedman/2007/12/04/further-thoughts-on-nie/
That's not to say of course that both sides aren't liars.
they both are. thats why its important to read both sides. and as for iran being the most belligerent country in the region it is simply not true. infact considering it is effectively surrounded it has been remarkably passive.
i would recommend the book Devils Game by Dreyfuss for an uncluttered history of western involvement and ties to the region.
DT, I would recommend that you read my first link, it more closely supports your opinion of the political games being played.
Here's another thought...have you noticed no one is mentioning the Syrian nuke facility that was recently destroyed? The Syrians had that site protected by the Russian cap technology that was supposed to deter detection and was (supposedly) able to withstand attack and destruction. Don't you think that gave the Iranians pause, maybe brought them secretly to the table?
Its nuclear program is one of those cards. Iran has had a vested interest in convincing the world -- unofficially, of course -- that it possesses a nuclear program. For Iran, the nuclear program is a trump card to be traded away, not a goal in and of itself.
thats been my estimation for a long time daphne, and ive been laughed for it.
its a very good article, although it suffers from a few slight of hands. the author indicates that sunni out weigh shia. this is not true for iran, which is 80% shia. and even if he is talking about the middle east as a whole the divide is certainly not enough to warrant the "many times over" claim. though i dont think thats as relevant as the arab v persian divide, which is significant. its not really a criticism though, and it certainly doesnt devalue the thrust of his article.
the other slight though is the claim that russia is the last state to occupy iran. while true it is not the entire picture. britian was there too. and was always a major player in persia, right up to 1953. When the US took over as the majority player from the west. Soviet russia also had virtually no part to play in post war iran. and had no major dealings with the iranian communists and had only to active agents (according to my last book on the subject). correspond this to US influence post 53, where the intelligence community considered iran to be a "playground" and was dotted with survellience stations on the border all pointing towards the USSR. the US may not have had boots on the ground, but their presence and influence was far from insignificant.
apart from that, i think he is spot on about the main aim being russia. the cold war was only dormant for the last 15 years. and that dormancy was only really in the public domain. the recent shift in rhetoric is down to the fact that russia is now in a strong economic position and america needs to free up resources to put effort in this direction.
Here's a very good debate from The Spectator and Iran features highly. It's also the first time that I have heard Ibn Warraq: very impressive.
http://www.spectator.co.uk/intelligence/we-should-not-be-reluctant-to-assert-the-superiority-of-western-values.mp3
cheers alan. im tidying the room and listening :)
usually its the TED lectures for me.
Thanks for reading it DT. I thought it made a lot of sense too, the political maneuvering on/in the Middle East is significant and deep. It's too easy to take the headlines to heart and make an emotional opinion.
the humantiy never learns,repeat their mistakes again and again...anyway in our demolish the world will sink,you cant kill this nation without dying.
Shawn,
Not sure if you're a Celt or an Iranian. I'm also uncertain if you're warning us or threatening us.
However...
What about that with the Russians then? Iran now has its uranium. Not weapons grade, no—or so we are assured.
If I were in Israel right now, I wouldn't be a happy bunny :0(
Im warning you from your self-destractive ways.
Not enough man kind have destroyed this plant with his filth and dirt,now a nuclar war?
Well a 3rd world war seems to be in the way.
And im prrety sure that in that world man kind will cease to exist.
well maybe the next cillvazition will be clever enough to live.
You see?your kind of thinking is what brought the world to his sorry condition
your 1st question was about my nationalizm,something that is not relvant at all and dont matter one tiny bit.
The human mind is working in terms of wars and blames.
Work like a selfish machine.
And becuase of that we are doomed anyway.
If israel will be bombed im pretty sure iran will be boombed to..instead of thinking how to save the world everyone thinking how to kill it even earlyer.
The russians?
I think they are taking over this country.
And maybe the 2nd holocaust will be as the first.
You know the orgin of nazism is not from Germany,but from russia,The Quezacks who grew very strong after the fall of CCCP in 91,are now have some controll in the russia goverment and maybe even here.
God knows what stupid humans will do,anyway I can just live and hope humanity will get at last its brain at least enough for existence.
you save the body by killing the germ that infects it. in this case the germ is Radical Islam and the source of that infestation is Iran
The irony of the NIE that the left also ignore is that the whole time Madelin Albright the Clintons and the state department were calling for the Normalization of relations with Iran they were busy working on building a bomb, so much for talking.
But when they saw the country they could only fight to a stalemate over an 8 year war get crushed in 10 days they immediatly ceased their most visable componants of their nuclear weapons program
Everyone is to blame equaly and nonely.
We dont need to look for guilties it will only lead for more wars,but i agree Iran is dangerous and something needed to be done in that situation.
And who got crushed in 10 days?